Griffiths in 1998 affirmed that there is no hope of conducting a perfect research (Griffiths 97). This statement has embroiled a lot of concerns in its support as well as views against it. To effectively explore this paradox, let’s start by individually defining the meaning of a perfect research. The word research in its definition refers to the careful investigation or inquiry by looking or searching for unknown facts concerning a specific category of knowledge (Litchman 7). The term perfect on the other hand, may be taken to mean the completeness of something. Researching in its literal meaning, refers to the act of searching in a study which has been previously done with the view of coming up with new findings that are not present in the previous study. When this declaration made by Griffiths is critically examined, it is evident that there is no hope of one doing a research that can be deemed to be perfect.

The main objective of doing any research is to find out any hidden truth or fact that has not yet been documented or discovered. This, therefore, means that if a research has been carried out in its initial stages and the fact or truth has been found, then there is no need of doing a another research with the sole aim of disputing the original truth that was found. Consequently, this implies that the original or initial research was not perfect and even if not disputed, it would still leave out something that can be found in the next research. Moreover, human beings are inherently different and thus different ways of conducting research. It is obvious that every researcher would bring his/her individual traits which are incorporated into the research and thus biasness of the results. This further implies that human beings always will leave something to be discovered by other persons. This is attributed to the way people think and the perception of different things or scenarios. Therefore, the process of conducting a research as well as the documentation of findings are ever informed by the research itself and the research outcomes perceived by the individual doing the research.

The deviations in perceptions attributed to personality differences are the key influences on the diverse controversies on dissimilar pools of knowledge and to rest these controversies, research is and will be done by different people who are disputing (Litchman 124). Thus, the problem is persistent since researchers are different and conduct their research with the main aim of asserting their own suppositions to be right while those of others to be wrong and hence the quest of voicing different or collaborative opinions on what has been previously done. This means that all research is conducted with the biasness of embedding it on earlier studies which is then progressed to the future studies. The ordeal of conducting research is ever commenced with the notion that any earlier information on a specific topic, either it be informed or expansive, still lacks perfection and therefore the current research is carried out to perfect it making more research to be done in improving what has been previously been done.

From the school of thoughts highlighted above, I totally agree with Griffiths (1998) declaration that there is no hope for a perfect research. To conclude, it is imperative that there is a continuing research wherever a particular research has been done leading to further research hence a vicious cycle of initiatives to counter previous research. This indicates that problems have resulted in the previous research and thus failure to be deemed perfect hence the need for newer research.

Works Cited

Griffiths, Morwenna. Educational Research for Social Justice: Getting Off the Fence. Doing Qualitative Research in Educational Settings. New York: Open University Press, 1998. Print.